• codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    2 days ago

    I especially like how the only example photo (from a fucking tweet of course) shows the completely flat non-ass of some anime goth girl that looks like she’s 14. We need to go back to making gamers ashamed of their hobby.

    • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      Not gamers. Closet pedos.

      It’s like how not all anime is for closet pedos. But there’s certainly a whole fucking lot that needs to be named and shamed.

      • ayaya@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Of course. Just like how GTA players are actually closet mass murderers.

        • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 day ago

          Sorry didn’t realize that sexualizing children is fine as long as they’re virtual and could never possibly lead to increased numbers of child sexual assaults.

          • theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Hey so two things:

            1. not all women have giant breasts and huge asses. Other body types exist. Most healthy women have smaller breasts than any you see on tv or in games or anime.

            2. The availability of violent video games and media correlates with lower violent crime.

            The availability of pornography correlates with lower rates of sexual crimes.

            Therefore it stands to reason, though it is unpleasant if not impossible to objectively test your conjecture is likely the opposite of reality.

            • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              15
              ·
              1 day ago

              Oh great, somebody that doesn’t understand stats.

              You know what else having access to violent video games correlates with that might be a bit more important than the video games themselves? Material wealth and higher standard of living. What happens to correlate with material wealth and higher standard of living? Less crimes of every single type.

              Also I don’t agree with the way the body is being sexualized in the comment above mine, but there is a serious problem, still, with sexualization of characters that explicitly look like children but are “totally a 200 year old vampire bro”. This is especially true of anime and video games with anime-inspired artwork. I’m not saying that all video games or animes are like this. Nor am I saying that all gamers and anime fans are closet pedos. What I am saying is that there’s serious problems in these communities that must be addressed. The pushback in spite of my non-condemnation of the whole is kinda hilarious. I do understand how my first comment could be misinterpreted.

              Never thought I’d get into an argument where somebody thought sexualization of minors was a good thing though, so I guess that’s a new experience at least.

              • theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                1 day ago

                We had you people try this shit in the 1990s.

                Violent media does not cause violence.

                Pornographic media does not cause sex crimes.

                Get the fuck back to your southern Baptist Church and leave the nonreligious alone. Stop pretending you give a shit about kids, you just want to push your weird little religion on everyone.

                • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Just so you know what the scientists studying this have to say:

                  Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010).

                  Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research.

                  While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research

                  https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fresearch.usc.edu.au%2Fview%2FpdfCoverPage%3FinstCode%3D61USC_INST%26filePid%3D13161500130002621%26download%3Dtrue&hl=en&scisig=AFWwaeZERt0h_qC0HOcMzLh1ghdF&oi=scholarr

                • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  10
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  I am not religious…

                  You, on the other hand, are very good at making up arguments to put in my mouth.

                  Bye bye now

              • Chozo@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                1 day ago

                Never thought I’d get into an argument where somebody thought sexualization of minors was a good thing though

                Nobody was making this argument, that’s a straw man you made up.

                • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  10
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 day ago

                  He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault…

                  Just because the argument was implicit and not explicit does not mean it wasn’t made. That was not a straw man.

                  The other commenter was actually strawmanning my position incredibly heavily in another comment, but I noticed you didn’t call that one out.

                  Lemmy is rife with this pedophile apologia, especially concerning threads about child pornography material made with AI and about comic style child pornography material, and I have no problem with saying that that is absolutely disgusting.

                  Are pedophiles mentally ill humans that need help? Yes. Should they be pushed towards active pedophilia in any way, shape, or form? No. They should not. As psychologists studying sexual abuse prevention agree, even in the case of VCSAM.

                  A direct excerpt from the paper:

                  Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010). Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research. While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research

                  https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fresearch.usc.edu.au%2Fview%2FpdfCoverPage%3FinstCode%3D61USC_INST%26filePid%3D13161500130002621%26download%3Dtrue&hl=en&scisig=AFWwaeZERt0h_qC0HOcMzLh1ghdF&oi=scholarr

                  • Chozo@fedia.io
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    10
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault…

                    YOU added the “minors” part. The person you replied to isn’t talking about minors. They used the word “women” specifically. Ironic that you said this earlier:

                    You, on the other hand, are very good at making up arguments to put in my mouth.